Department for Energy and Climate Change

ENDING NEW SUBSIDIES FOR ONSHORE WIND

Amber Rudd: The Government is committed to meeting objectives on cutting carbon emissions and the UK’s 2020 renewable energy targets. Onshore wind has deployed successfully to-date and is an important part of our energy mix. We now have enough onshore wind in the pipeline, to be subsidised by bill payers through the Renewable Obligation or Contracts for Difference, for onshore wind to play a significant part in meeting our renewable energy commitments. The Government was elected with a commitment to end new subsidies for onshore wind and to change the law so that local people have the final say on onshore windfarm applications. We are now giving effect to these changes in full through the introduction of an Energy Bill this session. The Energy Bill will devolve powers out of Whitehall so that applications for onshore wind farms are considered by democratically elected councils. My Rt Hon Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government is today making a statement on onshore wind development and local planning in England. This will set out new considerations to be applied to proposed wind energy development so that local people have the final say on wind farm applications. I am now setting out proposals to end new subsidies for onshore wind, specifically in relation to the Renewables Obligation (RO). Onshore wind is currently subsidised through three schemes: Contracts for Difference (CfDs) introduced by the last Government, and the Renewables Obligation and Feed-in-Tariffs introduced previously. With regard to CfDs, we have the tools available to implement our manifesto commitments on onshore wind and I will set out how I will do so when announcing plans in relation to further CfD allocations. I will also shortly be considering options for continued support for community onshore wind projects through the feed-in tariff (FITs) as part of the review that my department is conducting this year. The RO supports the overwhelming majority of current and future onshore wind capacity. Unlike CfDs, which introduce competition for subsidy and therefore drive costs down more quickly, the RO is demand-led and so poses more risk of pressure on consumer bills from increased demand for the subsidy. I am therefore announcing today that we will be introducing primary legislation to close the RO to new onshore wind from 1st April 2016 – a year earlier than planned. My department’s analysis indicates that, after taking into account an early closure, onshore wind deployment under the RO will be in the region of 11.6GW. In addition to the 0.75GW of onshore wind that has secured a CfD, this puts us above the middle of the range set out in the EMR Delivery Plan, our best estimate of what we would need to meet our 2020 targets. It is therefore appropriate to curtail further deployment of onshore wind, balancing the interests of onshore wind developers with those of the wider public. To protect investor confidence in the wider renewables sector, I am proposing a grace period which would continue to give access to support under the RO to those projects which, as of today, already have planning consent, a grid connection offer and acceptance, and evidence of land rights for the site on which their project will be built. I believe this draws the line in the right place but I want to hear views from the industry and other stakeholders before framing the terms of the legislation. I intend that any final proposals are applied across Great Britain and I am in the process of consulting with Scottish and Welsh Ministers on this matter. Since energy policy is devolved in Northern Ireland, I am currently in discussions with Ministers there to agree how our commitments on onshore wind will be implemented in Northern Ireland.

Department for Transport

EU Transport Council

Mr Robert Goodwill: I attended the second Transport Council under the Latvian Presidency (the Presidency) in Luxembourg on Thursday 11 June. The Council adopted a General Approach on the proposed Directive laying down technical standards for inland waterway vessels. There was broad support from Member States and the Commission for both the text and the related creation of the European Committee for Inland Navigation Standards (CESNI). The Commission indicated that it would now attempt to capitalise on this success by looking to harmonise other standards in the inland waterway sector, including training for crew. The Presidency appreciated the support of all Member States and the Commission in their efforts to reach agreement with the European Parliament on the complex technical pillar of the Fourth Railway Package.   On the market pillar, however, the Presidency was clear that more time was needed. I welcomed the improvements to date to address concerns on over-regulation but pressed that more needed to be done to ensure that competition could flourish and rail continued to be an attractive investment. In highlighting the success of the UK's liberalised and competitive rail market, I invited other Member States to visit the UK to learn from our experience. The main point of contention was the nature of possible exemptions from competitive tendering with the Commission supporting an exemption based on performance criteria while some Member States called for an exemption based on their share of the EU rail market being less than one per cent. I strongly pressed that any exemptions to competitive tendering had to be based on objective criteria and fully justified. On Air Passenger Rights, the Presidency presented their Progress Report. I underlined the UK’s strong support for the improvements in air passenger rights whilst reinforcing our position that the balanced and proportionate trigger points of 5/9/12 hours should be maintained, a view strongly echoed by some Member States. I also voiced strong concerns on the proposed inclusion of a compensation scheme for missed connecting flights, highlighting the negative impacts for both passengers and airlines. Two Member States called for a lower trigger point of three hours with another suggesting anything other than including three hours in line with interpretative case law from CJEU rulings was a step backwards in passenger rights. There was no discussion on the application of the regulation to Gibraltar Airport.   Under any other business, the Commission presented the conclusions of their interim evaluation on road safety, taking stock of progress towards the 50% reduction in fatalities by 2020. With regards to next steps the Commission indicated that it was considering proposing a target for reducing serious injuries.   On the Trans-European Network –Transport (TEN-T) and Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), the Christophersen-Bodewig-Secchi report which looks at making the best use of the new EU financial schemes for transport infrastructure projects, was presented. The authors called for urgent action to ensure the success of the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) for the transport sector and presented twelve recommendations for bringing private capital to the transport sector. The Commissioner invited Member State views on these recommendations ahead of the TEN-T days set to take place in Riga on 22 and 23 June.   The Presidency presented the outcome of the third Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) Transport Ministers’ meeting where ASEM member countries made a strong commitment to fostering closer cooperation in the field of transport connectivity.   The Commission updated the Council on the Shift2Rail research and innovation programme. The Commission regretted the delay in the recruitment of the Executive Director but considered the remainder of the programme was on track. I joined several Member States in thanking the Commission for the update and encouraging all efforts to ensure an accelerated deployment of the programme.   The Luxembourg Minister for Sustainable Development and Infrastructure presented the work programme of their upcoming Presidency stating their focus would remain on the Fourth Railway Package and achieving a General Approach on the market pillar by the October Transport Council. He invited Ministers to an Informal Council on 7 October focussing on cycling, followed by the formal Council on 8 October where there would be a policy debate on the Commission's review of its transport white paper. At the December Council there would be a policy debate on social conditions in road transport. 


This statement has also been made in the House of Lords: 
HLWS37

Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission

Assessment of Progress with the Transition to Individual Electoral Registration

Mr Gary Streeter: The Electoral Commission has today published a report on its analysis of the May 2015 electoral registers in Great Britain. This is part of the Commission’s programme of work monitoring the progress of the transition to Individual Electoral Registration (IER), and sets out the Commission’s recommendation on the timing of the end of the transition to IER. The Commission notes in its report that the Electoral Registers are used for other purposes, such as determining the distribution and boundaries of parliamentary constituencies, which are currently next due for review on the basis of the registers published in December 2015. However, it also makes clear that this report and the advice it contains focuses on the register’s capacity to support and enable effective participation in elections and referendums by all those who want to take part, which has been the Commission’s consistently stated focus during the transition to IER. The Commission reports that the transition to IER continues to progress well. Their analysis of the May 2015 parliamentary electoral registers identifies that the size of the electorate in Great Britain at that point was 45,336,013; an increase of 1% since February/March 2014 when the last registers were published under the household registration system. However, taking into account the data and evidence which is available at this point, and the polls scheduled for May 2016, the Commission is recommending that Ministers should not make an order to bring forward the end of the transition to IER. The Commission recommends that the end date for IER transition should remain, as currently provided for in law, December 2016. The Commission’s report sets out the reasons for this recommendation and its view that, although there are some potential benefits to the accuracy of the register, there is no compelling case for bringing forward the end of the transition given that this could risk disenfranchising a significant number of voters before the important set of polls scheduled for May 2016. The Commission’s goal is that the electoral registers support and enable effective participation in elections and referendums by all those who want to take part. Its analysis indicates that 1.9 million entries on the electoral registers relate to electors who are not registered individually. While there is still work to be done between now and December 2015 that the Commission expects will reduce the number of retained entries, it provides an indication of the maximum potential impact of ending the transition in December 2015. There is significant variation in how these 1.9 million register entries are distributed across different local authorities. While in two thirds of local authority areas the level of retained entries is between 1% and 3% of their total number of register entries, the range, across all authorities, is 0 to 23%. It is likely that many of the entries that would be removed from the register when the transition ends will be redundant (i.e. they relate to people who are no longer resident at that address). However, at this time, it is not possible for the Commission to tell how many are in fact for electors who are still resident and eligible to be registered to vote but who are not registered individually. It is also not possible for the Commission to tell how this balance between redundant entries and those for individuals who are still resident and eligible to remain registered at that particular address varies across and within different local authority areas. On balance, the Commission believes that it is preferable to retain entries which may be redundant rather than remove now an unknown number of entries which relate to electors who are correctly registered and would otherwise have remained on the register. This is because ERO activity over the 2015 canvass period is designed to enable redundant entries to be identified and removed. From 1 July 2015, EROs across Great Britain will be sending Household Enquiry Forms (HEFs) – which are designed to identify who is resident at an address and eligible to be registered - to all properties. EROs will also need to take prescribed steps to target existing electors who are not currently registered individually but appear to be eligible to remain registered so as to encourage them to make an application to register individually. While EROs will be carrying out this and other public engagement activity over the canvass period, it is not possible, at this point, to know what the impact of that activity will be, and so state with any certainty what this will do to the current volume of retained register entries. Separately, the data collected by the Commission also indicates that there remains an issue with the number of registered attainers. There were 247,705 attainers on the May 2015 local Government registers, which represents a fall of 47% in the number of registered attainers since February/March 2014. The Commission’s view is that this decline is largely attributable to the lack of comprehensive household canvass activity in 2014. The processes followed in 2014 were unique in this regard; canvass activity in 2015 and all subsequent years will involve sending household enquiry forms to all properties to check who is resident at an address and to identify new electors who can subsequently be invited to register, and carrying out follow up activity as required. All EROs should be updating their local public engagement strategies ahead of the 2015 canvass, reflecting the activity they intend to carry out to target under-registered groups, such as attainers. All EROs will need to ensure that their engagement strategies reflect the activity they will carry out to maximise the number of attainers who are registered, and working with schools and colleges within their area is a key area of activity the Commission will expect EROs to explore. Through the Commission’s work on performance standards, it will continue to monitor and support EROs in the process of updating their engagement strategies and delivering the activities identified within them. The Commission will be collecting further data from EROs on the conclusion of the 2015 canvass, including on the number of attainers, which they will report on in spring 2016. Copies of the Commission’s report have been placed in the library and it is also available on the Commission’s website: www.electoralcommission.org.uk

Department for Communities and Local Government

Local planning

Greg Clark: I am today setting out new considerations to be applied to proposed wind energy development so that local people have the final say on wind farm applications, fulfilling the commitment made in the Conservative election manifesto.   Subject to the transitional provision set out below, these considerations will take effect from 18 June and should be taken into account in planning decisions. I am also making a limited number of consequential changes to planning guidance.   When determining planning applications for wind energy development involving one or more wind turbines, local planning authorities should only grant planning permission if:   · the development site is in an area identified as suitable for wind energy development in a Local or Neighbourhood Plan; and   · following consultation, it can be demonstrated that the planning impacts identified by affected local communities have been fully addressed and therefore the proposal has their backing.   In applying these new considerations, suitable areas for wind energy development will need to have been allocated clearly in a Local or Neighbourhood Plan. Maps showing the wind resource as favourable to wind turbines, or similar, will not be sufficient. Whether a proposal has the backing of the affected local community is a planning judgement for the local planning authority.   Where a valid planning application for a wind energy development has already been submitted to a local planning authority and the development plan does not identify suitable sites, the following transitional provision applies. In such instances, local planning authorities can find the proposal acceptable if, following consultation, they are satisfied it has addressed the planning impacts identified by affected local communities and therefore has their backing. 


This statement has also been made in the House of Lords: 
HLWS36

House of Commons Commission

Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster – Independent Options Appraisal

Sir Paul Beresford: An independent appraisal of options for the restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster is published today. It was requested by the House of Commons Commission and the House of Lords House Committee in the last parliament following a pre-feasibility study and preliminary strategic business case which was published in October 2012. The new study has been carried out by a consortium consisting of Deloitte Real Estate, AECOM and HOK. The IOA (together with two volumes of detailed supporting materials) is available on the Parliament website at: www.restorationandrenewal.parliament.uk.The restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster will be a major challenge facing Parliament in the coming years and is certain to be a matter of public interest. The process to establish a Joint Committee, which will make recommendations to both Houses on how to proceed, is already under way. It will be for the Joint Committee to decide how best to carry out its task.